If in a game debate we have some quotes like "why someone would play Advanced Class X instead of Advanced Class Y?", because X is too clearly inferior and/or useless for a team; you can tell that this game lacks of a good development. In a PvP match, the hole fun consists exactly in a large variant of different play styles and classes to deal. But it seems that BW only wants to see Marauders/Sentinels, Tank Assassins/Shadows and Powertechs/Vanguards in a Warzone.
Untill 1.4, I thought that it was only because they are lazy enuff to fix it. But, after 1.4, I have no doubt that it was intentional. Maybe with only 4 or 5 different classes playing, the cost of a game server becomes cheaper...

i would just like to hear an explanation from the guys who balance/play these classes/game.

and if i hear the word metrics, i'd pimp slap them across the room.

it's unexcusable to suck this bad at doing what you are supposed to do, which is class balance. everybody that PvP's sees this, everybody knows this. obviously hyperbole, since nothing is being done about it, because the people that are tasked with this responsibility of making this game playable to all classes and specs sucks at their job.

i really would like to have a civil debate as to reasoning behind the continued nerfs to classes that don't deserve it, continued improvement to already superior classes, and the "metrics" they use to determine this.

anybody too analitical to ignore actual performance is the worst kind of craftsman. i'd love to see and "Undercover Boss" episode of SWTOR Dev PvP in RWZ with real players. at the end of the episode, like the garbage show on TV, they'd feel so remorseful and stupid at how little they actually know and understand their own business.

play the game, see how unbalanced PvP is, and how easy it is to correct by simply reworking a few abilities to put them on par with other classes.

"Ib'tuur jatne tuur ash'ad kyr'amur.""Today is a good day for someone else to die."-